Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30647040›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Can online self-reports assist in real-time identification of influenza vaccination uptake? A cross-sectional study of influenza vaccine-related tweets in the USA, 2013-2017.

Xiaolei Huang, Michael C Smith, Amelia M Jamison, David A Broniatowski, Mark Dredze, Sandra Crouse Quinn, Justin Cai, Michael J Paul

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Large language models for bioinformatics.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Clustering and topic modeling over tweets: A comparison over a health dataset.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine · 2019
    Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaolei HuangDepartment of Information Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Michael C SmithDepartment of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Amelia M JamisonCenter for Health Equity, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
David A BroniatowskiDepartment of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Mark DredzeDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Sandra Crouse QuinnCenter for Health Equity, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Justin CaiDepartment of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Michael J PaulDepartment of Information Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9149-7539
University of Colorado Boulder · USGeorge Washington University · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Supplementing Survey-Based Analyses of Group Vaccination Narratives and Behaviors Using Social MediaR01GM114771 · NIGMS · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BRONIATOWSKI, DAVID ANDRE, QUINN, SANDRA CROUSE · 2015 to 2019
$1.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM114771
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spend significant time and resources to track influenza vaccination coverage each influenza season using national surveys. Emerging data from social media provide an alternative solution to surveillance at both national and local levels of influenza vaccination coverage in near real time.

objectivesThis study aimed to characterise and analyse the vaccinated population from temporal, demographical and geographical perspectives using automatic classification of vaccination-related Twitter data.

methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we continuously collected tweets containing both influenza-related terms and vaccine-related terms covering four consecutive influenza seasons from 2013 to 2017. We created a machine learning classifier to identify relevant tweets, then evaluated the approach by comparing to data from the CDC's FluVaxView. We limited our analysis to tweets geolocated within the USA.

resultsWe assessed 1 124 839 tweets. We found strong correlations of 0.799 between monthly Twitter estimates and CDC, with correlations as high as 0.950 in individual influenza seasons. We also found that our approach obtained geographical correlations of 0.387 at the US state level and 0.467 at the regional level. Finally, we found a higher level of influenza vaccine tweets among female users than male users, also consistent with the results of CDC surveys on vaccine uptake.

conclusionSignificant correlations between Twitter data and CDC data show the potential of using social media for vaccination surveillance. Temporal variability is captured better than geographical and demographical variability. We discuss potential paths forward for leveraging this approach.

Indexed as

Medical InformaticsSocial MediaCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMachine LearningMaleNatural Language ProcessingSeasonsUnited StatesVaccination CoverageInfluenza Vaccinesepidemiologyhealth informaticspublic healthworld wide web technology

Identifiers

PMID30647040
PMCPMC6340631
OpenAlexW2910331986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.